Mandatory sentencing

A mandatory sentence is a judicial decision setting the punishment to be inflicted on a person convicted of a crime where judicial discretion is limited by law. Typically, people convicted of certain crimes must be punished with at least a minimum number of years in prison.

Related Topics:
Crime - Judicial discretion - Law - Prison

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In the United Kingdom, the Murder (Abolition of the Death Penalty) Act 1965 abolished the death penalty in most cases and laid down a manadatory of life imprisonment on a conviction for murder. The mandatory life sentence was one of the key planks in garnering support for the abolition of the death penalty, but has been criticised in recent years as being too inflexible (although, in practice, many convicted murderers are released on life licence after serving a substantial period in prison). By way of contrast, a judge has a broad discretion on a convicion of manslaughter to pass any sentence from an absolute discharge to life imprisonment.

Related Topics:
United Kingdom - Murder (Abolition of the Death Penalty) Act 1965 - Death penalty - Life imprisonment - Murder - Life licence - Manslaughter - Absolute discharge

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In 1973, New York State introduced mandatory minimum sentences of 15 years to life imprisonment for possession of more that four ounces (103g) of a hard drug. Similar laws were introduced across the United States.

Related Topics:
1973 - New York State - Hard drug

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here are references and a chart of U.S. federal mandatory minimum drug sentences.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

California's broader 'three strikes and you're out' policy adopted in 1994 was the first mandatory sentencing policy to gain widespread publicity and was subsequently adopted in most United States jurisdictions. This policy mandates life imprisonment for a third criminal conviction.

Related Topics:
California's - 1994 - United States - Jurisdiction

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A similar 'three strikes' policy was introduced to the United Kingdom by the Conservative government in 1997. This legislation enacted a mandatory minimum sentence of seven years for those convicted for a third time of a drug trafficking offence involving a class A drug and a mandatory minimum sentence of three years for those convicted for the third time of burglary. An amendment by the Labour opposition established that mandatory sentences should not be imposed if the judge considered it unjust. As a result, just three drug dealers and eight burglars received mandatory sentences in the next seven years, according to figures released by the British government in 2005.

Related Topics:
United Kingdom - Conservative - Government - 1997 - Legislation - Drug trafficking - Class A drug - Burglary - Labour - 2005

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Australia?s Northern Territory in March 1997 introduced mandatory sentences of one month to one year for the third offence regarding property and theft. They were later adopted by Western Australia.

Related Topics:
Northern Territory - Western Australia

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Adherents of mandatory sentencing believe that it reduces crime and ensures uniformity in sentencing. Potential criminals and repeat offenders are expected to avoid crime because they can be certain of their sentence if they are caught.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Arguments against mandatory sentencing include claims that it is unfair and can cause overcrowding in prisons. It is widely argued that such laws unfairly target disadvantaged minority groups who are more likely to be imprisoned because they are most likely to come into contact with the justice system through family disadvantage, lack of education, and limited vocational outlook. In the United States critics have argued that laws designed to counter drug overlords were trapping minor offenders and imprisoning some for life. Opponents say that uniform sentencing cannot be fair for non-uniform crimes and that it is not possible to build a pre-determined tariff that can cover all circumstances.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In the United States mandatory sentencing laws are being repealed. An academic study of the Massachusetts prison population published by Harvard in 1997 found that nearly half of the offenders sentenced to long mandatory-minimum terms for drug related offenses had no record of violent crime. The study concluded that jailing nonviolent drug offenders does not cure drug addiction and that the laws were "wasting prison resources on nonviolent, low-level offenders and reducing resources available to lock up violent offenders"

Related Topics:
Massachusetts - Harvard - 1997

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Opposition to juvenile mandatory sentencing in Australia and a harshly critical United Nations report caused the government to intervene in the Northern Territory in 2000. The debate became particularly heated in 2001 after a young aboriginal/indigenous man committed suicide whilst serving time for stealing stationery worth A$90. The Northern Territory repealed their mandatory sentencing laws in October 2001. An analysis of the effects of mandatory sentencing concluded that indigenous people were heavily over-represented, the length of the minimum sentence was not an adequate deterrent, the effect on prison population was manageable and that the level of custodial sentencing rose by 50% under mandatory sentencing.

Related Topics:
2000 - 2001

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Australia, Mexico, New Zealand and some other countries employ a system of mandatory restorative justice, in which the criminal must apologise to the victim or provide some form of reparation instead of being imprisoned.

Related Topics:
Australia - Mexico - New Zealand - Reparation

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~